HOME



Welcome to Fluoride Information Australia research blog
A comprehensive archive of many Scientific and Research papers, Letters to Authorities, Affidavits, Media items, General articles, Ethical and Debate questions, Chemical information and much more — all to assist your research on the issue of Water Fluoridation.

This blog is the result of many years in collating hundreds of documents (currently, there is over 380 handpicked files) – including some rare or out-of-print items; but up-to-date, credible information to do your research by. This archive is also inclusive of various reports completed by Fluoride Information Australia’s personal research interests.
Please share widely, into the community, this blog – education is vital, and knowledge is power.

Fluoride capsules

Technical information: Articles are indexed in alphabetical order and most are in .pdf  format; or very occasionally in .ppt format; plus there are a few (related) links to open.
You will need:
Acrobat Reader http://get.adobe.com/reader 
[choose  either the Mac or PC version] to download and read the PDF files
Internet browser for opening the (occasional) links
Powerpoint software [Mac or PC]


The Judgment – FLUORIDE ACTION NETWORK – Lawsuit against EPA on ‘water fluoridation’

History has been made. After 7 years of pursuing legal action against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over the risk posed to the developing brain by the practice of water fluoridation, the United States District Court of the Northern District of Californiahas just ruled on behalf of the Fluoride Action Network and the plaintiffs in our precedent-setting court case. A U.S. federal court has now deemed fluoridation an “unreasonable risk” to the health of children, and the EPA will be forced to regulate it as such. The decision is written very strongly in our favor, and we will share it in its entirety tomorrow. Below is an excerpt from the introduction of the ruling:

“The issue before this Court is whether the Plaintiffs have established by a preponderance of the evidence that the fluoridation of drinking water at levels typical in the United States poses an unreasonable risk of injury to health of the public within the meaning of Amended TSCA. For the reasons set forth below, the Court so finds. Specifically, the Court finds that fluoridation of water at 0.7 milligrams per liter (“mg/L”) – the level presently considered “optimal” in the United States – poses an unreasonable risk of reduced IQ in children..the Court finds there is an unreasonable risk of such injury, a risk sufficient to require the EPA to engage with a regulatory response…One thing the EPA cannot do, however, in the face of this Court’s finding, is to ignore that risk.”

In this moment, I want to recognize attorney Michael Connett for pursuing this case and leading the effort every step of the way. He’s a true superhero to all of us here at FAN. Many other amazing team members were also involved in making this a reality and deserve great appreciation and thanks, including our co-plaintiffs and all of you who donated and spread the word about our case. Take a moment to celebrate this momentous occasion tonight, wherever you are. After 7 years, we all deserve it.


For the reasons set forth below, the Court so finds. Specifically, the Court finds that fluoridation of water at 0.7 milligrams per liter (“mg/L”) – the level presently considered “optimal” in the United States – poses an unreasonable risk of reduced IQ in children..the Court finds there is an unreasonable risk of such injury, a risk sufficient to require the EPA to engage with a regulatory response…One thing the EPA cannot do, however, in the face of this Court’s finding, is to ignore that risk.”
https://fluoridealert.org/key-topics/epa-lawsuit/

See full COURT ruling here:
Court-Ruling

——